If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I am assuming there is a lot of stuff about the girlfriend that didn't make it to trial???

The girlfriend says she saw Candace a couple of times around the neighborhood. So then I was wondering if Grant was with the girlfriend any of these times. That was not asked of the gf on the stand. I am going to assume it was asked way back when and then again for this trial.

But I do not understand what significance any of the girlfriend testimony is. All it did was get it out there that Grant had escaped on an unrelated charge and that their relationship ended when he was apprehended on the unrelated charge.

The jury at the Candace Derksen murder trial heard more complex scientific testimony when proceedings resumed on Thursday morning.

Mark Edward Grant faces a charge for first-degree murder in the case, which dates back to November 1984.

He has pleaded not guilty.

The case has focused largely on DNA evidence so far, and the lawyers on both sides argued about the reliability of the scientific investigation into the death of 13-year-old Derksen almost 26 years ago.

Testimony began Thursday with Arlene Lahti, a scientist who specializes in mitochondrial DNA and who was a founder of a company called Molecular World.

In spring of 2007, Lahti received samples from the Derksen case. They were blood samples taken from numerous people, she testified.

That group included Dave Wiebe and Audrey Fontaine, who have previously testified about being suspects years ago in the Derksen case.

Simmonds also asked Lahti about the data that can be learned from mitochondrial DNA, which can rule out a person as a match to another DNA sample, but cannot specifically single out one individual as a match, without the use of additional information.

On Thursday, DNA scientist Curtis Hildebrandt told court seven hairs found on Candace Derksen's clothing and in the shed where she died shared the same DNA profile as Mark Grant.

On Friday, defence lawyer Saul Simmonds suggested Hildebrandt had a vested interest in developing a DNA profile that would connect Grant to the murder, as Hildebrandt had bought stock in his publicly traded employer, Warnex PRO-DNA.

I so hoped the SCC would uphold the original verdict, but it was a 7-0 decision to order a new trial. I don't know how this family keeps going, but the parents are representative of a masterclass in how to cope and go on after losing a child to murder. I've read both of Wilma Derksen's books, "Have You Seen Candace" and "This Mortal Coil" and I highly recommend both. The latter is especially gripping as Derksen goes through all the evidence and comes to terms with what she believes actually went on in the shed in Candace's final hours.

I wish the "second girl" would just admit once and for all that she made up her abduction and was just a 12-year-old girl looking for attention. I was a 12-year-old girl once (a long time ago) and can relate to her motives. Derksen's entire case hinges on this girl (now woman). I just can't believe the SCC didn't see the girl's case for what it was. This ruling is going to open a huge Pandora's Box for other accused people to bring up the idea of an "unknown third party" when it really shouldn't apply.

Whatever happens, I truly hope Wilma and Cliff Derksen can find peace...whatever that looks like for them.

"A date has been set for a new trial in the death of a Winnipeg girl 31 years ago."

snip>

"The higher courts said the trial judge erred in not allowing the defence to present evidence that pointed to another possible killer — an unidentified man involved in a similar attack while Grant was in custody."

snip>

"The trial is scheduled to begin Jan. 16, 2017, and run until March 3, 2017"

Thirty-two years to the week since Candace was found, the Derksens continue to believe Grant is guilty.
"I resent it. I'm angry," said Wilma of the retrial. "Why do we have to go through this again? We were convinced the first time."
Grant has always denied killing Candace and won back his presumption of innocence after his successful appeal.
Now in his 50s, the Winnipeg man will be retried for Candace's murder, beginning Jan. 16.
DNA evidence was crucial to Grant's arrest in 2007. A forensic specialist called to testify by the Crown at his first trial said there was a one-in-50-million chance the DNA found on the twine used to tie Candace's limbs together belonged to anyone other than Grant.
After a jury found him guilty in 2011, Grant filed an appeal and two years later was granted a retrial. His defence lawyer put forward several grounds for appeal, arguing evidence that may have helped acquit Grant was withheld, regarding the abduction of another girl.
Nine months after Derksen's body was found, and while Grant was in custody, a crime similar to Derksen's abduction took place. Another girl was found tied up in a boxcar not too far from the shed where Derksen was discovered, using the same knots used on Derksen. No suspect has ever been charged in relation to the second abduction.Grant's retrial is expected to include evidence of an unknown third party potentially involved in both cases.

Is there more detail somewhere on the 12 year old that makes it clear it was made up?

I'm totally open to the idea as I have personal experience with a kid making false allegations and I'd hate to think they have the wrong guy. (Not that he's any angel clearly.)

However what's in here doesn't sound easy for a 12 year old to pull off. Binding her hands with a plastic bag over her head? I'm not very coordinated admittedly but still. The gum wrapper is also a bit of a coincidence.